Re: The Great Downsizing of comp.sys.be.*
John Harbl
> comp.sys.be.advocacy Why BeOS is better/worse than XYZ.
> comp.sys.be.programmer Topics related to BeOS programming.
I would be saddened if these two newsgroups were to go away. With the
increasing nearness to beta that the BeOS-alike Haiku OS
(http://www.haiku-os.org/) is approaching, there is a likelihood of a
resurgence in activity around about these here parts.
If comp.sys.newton.* can survive, then so can comp.sys.be.*. I do,
however, wholeheartedly support the removal of rec.music.iranian. If
you've ever lived in Southern California, you'll know *exactly* why.
- J.
Steve Bonine
> On 2/9/11 7:00 PM, Big-8 Management Board wrote:
>
>> comp.sys.be.advocacy Why BeOS is better/worse than XYZ.
>> comp.sys.be.programmer Topics related to BeOS programming.
>
> I would be saddened if these two newsgroups were to go away. With the
> increasing nearness to beta that the BeOS-alike Haiku OS
> (http://www.haiku-os.org/) is approaching, there is a likelihood of a
> resurgence in activity around about these here parts.
Congratulations. This is the very first objection that actually makes
sense.
It seems unlikely to me that people who want to discuss this new haiku
OS would find/use a newsgroup with a name containing "be". That's a bit
of a stretch. It would be better to propose a new newsgroup containing
the name "haiku" that people who want to discuss the topic would be
likely to find.
> If comp.sys.newton.* can survive, then so can comp.sys.be.*.
The fact that one newsgroup survives while another is dead indicates
that there are people who want to discuss the one, while there are none
who want to discuss the other. It does not suggest that the dead group
should survive.
John Harbl
> John Harbl wrote:
>> On 2/9/11 7:00 PM, Big-8 Management Board wrote:
>>
>>> comp.sys.be.advocacy Why BeOS is better/worse than XYZ.
>>> comp.sys.be.programmer Topics related to BeOS programming.
>>
>> I would be saddened if these two newsgroups were to go away. With the
>> increasing nearness to beta that the BeOS-alike Haiku OS
>> (http://www.haiku-os.org/) is approaching, there is a likelihood of a
>> resurgence in activity around about these here parts.
>
> Congratulations. This is the very first objection that actually makes
> sense.
Thank you. It's nice to know that the drugs are finally working for me.
> It seems unlikely to me that people who want to discuss this new haiku
> OS would find/use a newsgroup with a name containing "be". That's a bit
> of a stretch. It would be better to propose a new newsgroup containing
> the name "haiku" that people who want to discuss the topic would be
> likely to find.
Not really a stretch, given that Haiku is an open reimplementation of
BeOS. Haiku is binary-compatible with BeOS and the link between the two
is well-known. If anything, I'd expect cross-pollination between the
existing BeOS community and Haiku's.
>> If comp.sys.newton.* can survive, then so can comp.sys.be.*.
>
> The fact that one newsgroup survives while another is dead indicates
> that there are people who want to discuss the one, while there are none
> who want to discuss the other. It does not suggest that the dead group
> should survive.
Yes, but which is the dead group in your context? Who decided (and by
what metrics) that either one was pining for the fjords? It could just
as easily be argued that if anything, comp.os.be.* is more alive than
comp.os.newton.* simply because someone is taking an active interest in
preserving it.
- J.
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
>Yes, but which is the dead group in your context?
comp.sys.be.advocacy Why BeOS is better/worse than XYZ.
comp.sys.be.programmer Topics related to BeOS programming.
>Who decided ...
The Big-8 Management Board.
>(and by
>what metrics)
No ontopic posts in the last 18 months.
>It could just
>as easily be argued that if anything, comp.os.be.* is more alive than
>comp.os.newton.* simply because someone is taking an active interest in
>preserving it.
Whoever that person or those persons may be, he or she seems (or they
seem) not to be posting to the two newsgroups named above.
That is what the board means by "alive" and "dead."
Marty
--
Member of the Big-8 Management Board (B8MB) <http://www.big-8.org>
Unless otherwise indicated, I speak for myself, not for the Board.
Steve Bonine
> On 2/10/11 1:42 AM, Steve Bonine wrote:
>> It seems unlikely to me that people who want to discuss this new haiku
>> OS would find/use a newsgroup with a name containing "be". That's a bit
>> of a stretch. It would be better to propose a new newsgroup containing
>> the name "haiku" that people who want to discuss the topic would be
>> likely to find.
>
> Not really a stretch, given that Haiku is an open reimplementation of
> BeOS. Haiku is binary-compatible with BeOS and the link between the two
> is well-known. If anything, I'd expect cross-pollination between the
> existing BeOS community and Haiku's.
I see no evidence that there exists a BeOS community on Usenet. There
are currently four BeOS newsgroups -- programmer, help, misc, and
advocacy. There is no recent on-topic traffic in any of them, other
than one posting in .help with no response.
>>> If comp.sys.newton.* can survive, then so can comp.sys.be.*.
>>
>> The fact that one newsgroup survives while another is dead indicates
>> that there are people who want to discuss the one, while there are none
>> who want to discuss the other. It does not suggest that the dead group
>> should survive.
>
> Yes, but which is the dead group in your context? Who decided (and by
> what metrics) that either one was pining for the fjords? It could just
> as easily be argued that if anything, comp.os.be.* is more alive than
> comp.os.newton.* simply because someone is taking an active interest in
> preserving it.
The metrics used are described in the RFD and are limited to on-topic
traffic. Obviously it is not possible to deduce that anyone is
interested in the newsgroup if no one has posted anything there in a
very long time. That's one reason that the list was posted before the
newsgroups were removed from the list; you are the first person to raise
a rational objection to the removal of a specific newsgroup.
We now know two things that we didn't before -- there is one person in
the universe interested in BeOS on Usenet, and there is an upcoming
event (the release of an operating system related to BeOS) that might
generate traffic in the two newsgroups proposed for removal. On the
other hand, there will still be two newsgroups available for this
discussion, so the removal of the two groups might actually improve it
by concentrating it. Like many other topics, we don't need multiple
newsgroups in which to (not) discuss BeOS.
John Harbl
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 01:22:02 CST, John Harbl<jha...@harbl.com> wrote in<iivv9u$39m$1...@speranza.aioe.org>:
>
>> Yes, but which is the dead group in your context?
>
> comp.sys.be.advocacy Why BeOS is better/worse than XYZ.
> comp.sys.be.programmer Topics related to BeOS programming.
Cool. It wasn't totally clear to me if it was the entire comp.sys.be.*
hierarchy or just specific groups under it.
>> Who decided ...
>
> The Big-8 Management Board.
They sound *very* managerial indeed.
>> (and by
>> what metrics)
>
> No ontopic posts in the last 18 months.
Whoa, has it really been that long?
Google Groups' archive says 'yes'. I'll be damned. Time flies when
you're not really paying attention, I guess.
>> It could just
>> as easily be argued that if anything, comp.os.be.* is more alive than
>> comp.os.newton.* simply because someone is taking an active interest in
>> preserving it.
>
> Whoever that person or those persons may be, he or she seems (or they
> seem) not to be posting to the two newsgroups named above.
I shake my fist at the person or persons involved. He, she, it, or they
should really be taking an interest and make no mistake about it.
> That is what the board means by "alive" and "dead."
What if it's only resting?
- J.
John Harbl
> John Harbl wrote:
>> On 2/10/11 1:42 AM, Steve Bonine wrote:
> I see no evidence that there exists a BeOS community on Usenet. There
> are currently four BeOS newsgroups -- programmer, help, misc, and
> advocacy. There is no recent on-topic traffic in any of them, other than
> one posting in .help with no response.
That saddens me. Not just :( sad, but :_(((( sad. This hierarchy was
once a thriving, vibrant marketplace of freewheeling discussion related
(to varying degrees) to the Be Operating System. That it has fallen
into such disuse is not a cause for celebration.
> The metrics used are described in the RFD and are limited to on-topic
> traffic. Obviously it is not possible to deduce that anyone is
> interested in the newsgroup if no one has posted anything there in a
> very long time. That's one reason that the list was posted before the
> newsgroups were removed from the list; you are the first person to raise
> a rational objection to the removal of a specific newsgroup.
Understood. Hell, I've been a BeOS user since 1998 and even *I* didn't
notice.
> We now know two things that we didn't before -- there is one person in
> the universe interested in BeOS on Usenet, and there is an upcoming
> event (the release of an operating system related to BeOS) that might
> generate traffic in the two newsgroups proposed for removal. On the
> other hand, there will still be two newsgroups available for this
> discussion, so the removal of the two groups might actually improve it
> by concentrating it. Like many other topics, we don't need multiple
> newsgroups in which to (not) discuss BeOS.
That makes a lot of sense. To be honest, my main concern was that the
entire comp.sys.be.* hierarchy was slated for removal, but that's been
cleared up elsewhere in this thread. Realistically, losing a couple as
long as (at least) .misc remains likely wouldn't hurt anything.
So... Will comp.sys.be.misc survive the purge? Granted, we're a small
community these days, but having at least some USENET presence would be
good. Besides, there's at least one person who is still paying
attention (me), so if someone comes here seeking advice, etc. on the
recommendation of old documentation or the like at least they're not
likely to end up in the bitbucket.
- J.
Steve Bonine
> So... Will comp.sys.be.misc survive the purge? Granted, we're a small
> community these days, but having at least some USENET presence would be
> good. Besides, there's at least one person who is still paying attention
> (me), so if someone comes here seeking advice, etc. on the
> recommendation of old documentation or the like at least they're not
> likely to end up in the bitbucket.
It's not on the list of newsgroups in the RFD so it's not going anywhere
in this batch.
My examination of comp.sys.be.misc did not turn up any traffic. Perhaps
I missed it. But if the status quo continues, and there are further
removals of dead groups, comp.sys.be.misc will be lumped in with all the
other newsgroups which have no on-topic traffic.
Alexander Bartolich
> [...]
> So... Will comp.sys.be.misc survive the purge? Granted, we're a small
> community these days, but having at least some USENET presence would be
> good. Besides, there's at least one person who is still paying
> attention (me), so if someone comes here seeking advice, etc. on the
> recommendation of old documentation or the like at least they're not
> likely to end up in the bitbucket.
On this round we explicitly excempted *.misc groups. I have got the
notion that we should wait a few months to evaluate the results and
then start a second round in fall 2011. That's about all the planning
there is at the moment.
I have no problems granting you an extension beyond that. My only con-
dition is that you set yourself a target, e.g. a handful of threads
until 2012-01-01, or whatever.
Ciao
Alexander.
John Harbl
> If you have any objections, please make them heard in moderated group
> news.groups.proposals. The "Followup-To:" header is set on this message,
> so simply replying to this post should do the right thing.
Just a quick howdy-ho to let everyone know (per my posting a month ago)
that yes, these groups are still being watched.
<3 <3 <3,
- J.